About your Search

20121112
20121120
STATION
CSPAN 6
CNBC 5
MSNBCW 4
CSPAN2 3
MSNBC 3
FBC 1
KNTV (NBC) 1
WBAL (NBC) 1
LANGUAGE
English 24
Search Results 0 to 23 of about 24 (some duplicates have been removed)
they already agreed to that. i think you heard john boehner say that already. we've had votes in the senate where we've actually gotten rid of tax credits. i think that's a given. and i think the vast majority of americans agree with that. the question is how do you do that and how do you allow taxes to rise at the same time you fix the real problem? and the real problem is uncontrolled entitlement spending and a government that has grown massively. not just under this administration, under republican administration. >> let me turn to senator schumer on this point. >> so you have to approach both sides of it. >> let me turn to senator schumer. i'm going to ask you the same question. if the mandate is compromised, what do democrats have to be prepared to accept as a painful outcome in order to achieve compromise? >> well, i agree with you, the mandate is compromise. that's why we have a divided house and senate. and i think if the house stands for anything it's cut government spending, as tom coburn said, and i think we're going to have to do more of it. we heard the mandate in 2010, where i
directly at odds with house speaker john boehner. >> could you accept a deal that does not include tax rate increases for the wealthy? we've seen talk about a possible compromise that could leave rates the same but cap deductions for high-income earners. is that something that's acceptable? >> no. >> not at all no, way? >> no. the preponderance made it very clear in his campaign that there are not enough -- what you just described is a formula and a blueprint for hampering our future. you cannot go forward -- you have to cut some investments. if you cut too many you are hampering growth, you're hampering education, investments for the future. >> and even thousands of miles away it appears president obama is still focused on those negotiations. while touring a royal monastery with secretary of state clinton in thailand the president was overheard mentioning the budget talks to a monk. the president later clarified his comments -- >> he's not any monk. >> no. >> he has some big i vestments in the stock market. >> he later clarified his comments at a news conference. >> yes, we were working on
. rich: they are not offering very many specifics this early on. we do have a ways to go. john boehner did offer framework. the framework would have tax and entitlement targets, revenue targets, spending targets, that this year in the next couple months. congress would work out the details in 2013. both leaders from both parties and both houses say it is time to get to work. >> we will continue to have revenue on the table. we are serious. we are serious about cutting spending and solving our fiscal problems. >> we will do it now. we feel very comfortable with each other. this is not something we will wait until the last day of december to get it done. rich: they met for a little longer than an hour here at the white house. much of the talk was positive. there really is not anything close to specifics right now coming from anyone in all of this. here he read and nancy pelosi really did not mention entitlement at all. rich o'connell highlighted the fact that his conference in the senate believes that this country does not have a taxing problem, it has a spending problem. there are still
back and forth. you had boehner's position from the -- >> i don't want to anger the viewers, you but i think they're looking at obama's words the same way they look it at the polls with the kind of sense of here's what i want to believe. >> if they lose, do they go along with that and say we will accept that or do they push it over the fiscal cliff. you have people on the right and the left who are saying go over. >> in the press conference yesterday, my read of what obama said was we're raising the rates and we're put a structure for eliminating entitlements. >> correct. but if we're talking about rates, if you were playing joe, you would hear that the argument would be that this will never actually work. republicans won't go loochialon it. so some people were suggesting maybe there is a way to do 35% and get rid of deductions. >> but remember was it geithner on -- today is thursday. so this would have been tuesday. he said people are diluting themselves to think we can get where we need to get with loopholes. and i don't know about the right max, but my understanding is i don't think
to december 29th and dictator obama forced this on us. is that the game mcconnell and boehner play here? >> i think they know that game won't play well. they have to play it. everyone has to take a sacrifice here, and when you do the numbers with america's finances to keep the entitlements entact, if slightly different from today, to keep social security intact and get the economy back and growing, everyone has to take a little bit of a hit, whether it's the private equity guy with his carried interest exclusion and the $750,000 home morn tax deduction, which is completely absurd. that doesn't help the middle class. they all have to happen. if everyone is -- you saw bob corker last week or over the weekend. there are a lot of sensible people out there. i think sensible minds will prevail. this is just a fiscal cliff. it pushes it off to july 4th to be patriotic with an agreement and framework to work towards a big deal. it is only this artificial construct we're talking about now. what we need to get for everybody to be happy and the markets to be happy and the chinese and the japanese and th
not having the same level of influence in terms of those races. before hand, speaker boehner had a hard time getting some of his more conservative members to buy in to certain concrete hiatt -- compromises. going forward, we will have to see if the tea party conservatives will seem to have the same support. the president now has the upper hand and when he talks to speaker boehner he will have to take that message back and he gets a little bit more behind him. >> week and a shop with a meeting between the leaders and the white house. what is the dynamic? >> it will be very interesting to see. hopefully we will hear from them exactly what their conversation was with the president. it is unlikely that we're going to see a detailed agreement on specific issues. are we going to hear about tax breaks or how entitlement reform is going to happen in the deal? on not sure. these figures are going to be out there. they're all going to be scrambling to set the tone in the way that they want to set it. of they will have discussions like the democratic leaders also say let these are the areas where we ma
incomes now and ensuring security for the future. hthis is the end of vision that speaker boehner without for the country last week. i cannot think why the present would not embrace it. someone said we should go over the cliff. just go off of the cliff. hope for the best. i do not think that is what the american people had in mind when they went to the polls last week. but they had in mind is that we put the contest of the past two years behind us and work it out. the best way forward in the way that will lead to jobs and growth, a smaller deficits, and you were political fights is to keep everyone where they are. figure out a way to avoid the automatic defense cuts scheduled to hit at the end of the year without putting a penny last thing we promised and committed to the entitlement reforms that we all claim we want. a simpler tax code that lowers rates and cuts special interest loopholes would create jobs and result in more revenue without raising anyone's rates. we know this because we have seen it before. it actually works. i do not think washington should get any of that extra revenu
.6 trillion of new revenue. boehner had agreed to $800 billion. it's not hard to find $1.2 trillion as a kind of middle ground to that. then you want to have $4 trillion of total deficit reduction, so that leaves $2.8 trillion of spending reductions that have to happen. here's what people miss. we can avoid going over the cliff with the stroke of a pen. they can just extend all this stuff and kick the can down the road. the real question is are we going to have a big deal? are we going to agree on the major spending restraints that we need as well as the tax stuff in order to actually get the deficit under control? and i think the betting on that is less than 50%. i think we have a great shot at it. but it's going to be really, really hard. >> is that the view from wall street, too? they're not totally confident that this is going to happen? >> what you see in the stock market at the moment is that wall street is not totally confident. that's for sure. >> all right. steve, thanks so much. >> pleasure. >>> coming up, independent senator-elect of maine, angus king joins the conversation. he's a
to bottom here. it's just that there's not as many. >> if you saw a headline, boehner-obama to agree to long-term solution, you would hit buy first on com? >> we no longer have to worry about rising above? >> i think we'll see that as a joke. >> only up 3% to 5% between now and tuesday. that's not their focus. >> i understand. >> but remember when germany went down, when the german forces went down. those are countries that are dominated by rich people. a lot of those companies are plutocrasies. i think when their market went down, they said holy cow, maybe we ought to do something, maybe monty ought to get together, our country t.a.r.p., that first vote, i think people said, okay, i'm going to have to work the rest of my life, there goes my 401(k) and the congressmen rise above. i hope it doesn't take that. i hope it didn't. >> we do have some media news today, viacom is out with some numbers. >> viacom is not as bad as i had feared. the market numbers down about 6% for the company which is perhaps a little bit better than might have been expected. if you take a look over the last few weeks
. john boehner still in the house for the time being at the treasury. the president is back in the white house and harry reid is in the senate with a few more seats. why should i believe this would end any more positively than the summer of 2011? >> because again i'm not going to try to talk to you in optimism but let's look at what's changed. you have republican leadership acknowledging for the first time in this debate in public that it's agreed to increase in revenues as part of an agreement that helps restore fiscal balance. that's a very important change. you can debate on what motivated that change, and of course it's true that approach has been a popular very substantial support among the american people. you have a much greater recognition that the economy would benefit on a carefully designed balanced agreement on fiscal reform and putting it off indefinitely is not good for the country. that's important, too. and i also think again if you listen carefully to what people are saying and what many politicians are saying with many elected representatives are saying there's a lot of
years later, what moment are we in as boehner enters? >> this is a magic moment, i really do. it is a moment when our generation has a chance to do something about this problem that we created. it is our generation that got us into this mess, and we ought to get ourselves out. we got a good chance. you got a second-term democrat president who has come out and said he is willing to put entitlements on the table. big deal. you've got a speaker, a republican speaker, who really gets at, who really understands the depths of the problems we face, and he has come out and said we are going to put revenues on the table. big move. he got at least half the members of the senate already saying they will support a balanced plan, which makes a lot of sense. we have got the business community lined up firmly against -- for doing something smart, and i guess most importantly, we got this fiscal cliff where if we go over it, we are going to face the most predictable economic crisis in history. fortunately for all of us, it is also the most of voidable. this is the magic moment to get somethi
a guy before i worked for romney i worked for boehner in the majority leader officer, i called up the digital guy tell me about twitter. how it's going work. he said you don't need to know it. it's not a big thing. here we're now, i notice during the campaign so much of what we did was driven from the bottom up through twitter. and -- even when i was on the plane. we would do the different gaggle. she would do it on a bigger plane. air force one. we call pear force one. i would got back of the plane and gaggle for fifteen or twint minutes. by the time i would come back i would come back on twitter and say it made news. >> people responded and taked you on twitter. >> when you say people you don't mean people you mean reporters. >> or people. [laughter] reporters are not people. >> that was on the free to be you and me. the reporters are people. but you mean this was the kind of back stage conversation you were watching playout on twitter? sometimes real people. it was more important how the journalist were using twitter. >> yeah. it became a incredible news. you could see the jour
that are addressing boehner build is they discovered every couple days. they easily --vulnerabilities they discovered every couple days and patched up. it is very important you keep your start -- software and hardware up to current configuration c do not have any vulnerabilities. almost all of those agencies are reporting they are not doing that. segregation of duties -- this may not be the most important. this is the fox guarding the hen house. you have secured personnel responsible for security management. those should be different people than the people who have just general system administration functions. in general when you get into a very trusted organization many times this person could be one and the same. then you have contingency planning or disaster recovery. this deals with if something does happen, and a natural disaster or a man-made disaster or an attack, can you get back up if your system crashes? you have redundancy behind it? is it running in parallel with your current system, a hot backup so it ultimately goes over -- automatically goes over, or is there some process for you back
can tell you that the guys in the house and boehner, they really want to do this, this limiting deductions, limiting loopholes, raising effective rates, but lowering nominal rates. they want to do it that way but the president may say no and those guys in the house will say no and we might, it might happen. >> it might, but look, this is a leadership moment. we have a a leader who now has second term. he's a president. he's a fascinating individual in many respects. he's part of the problem. >> what gives you any indication he'll lead in this case? >> maybe he'll wake up to the fact that he has a chance to cut through the polarization and leave a winning legacy. this is his chance to rise above. give him a button. >> there you go. thank you for that, steve. we have more ahead from steve. coming up, we're going to talk about several stocks on the move ahead of the opening bell. we'll get down to "mad money's" jim cramer. "squawk on the street," jim cramer right after this. sometimes investing opportunities are hard to spot. you have to dig a little. fidelity's etf market tracker
of the fact that they're worried about what's not going to happen. after the election, boehner came out, thought he'd move some, and then obama came out the next day, and in the early part of his speech, he looked good. and all of a sudden he starts digging in. if you look at what the stock market did, it immediately dropped. came back a little bit that day, but immediately dropped. that's what's in people's minds and it's scaring the heck out of them. we have to have some solution. >> when we look to europe, it's a very similar scenario. we have all these issues revolving around greece and maybe to a lesser extent, spain, and it seems about the same dynamics. that it isn't results oriented, it's idle the car and hope things get better while you're sitting in there, hunkered down. >> that's absolutely the case. they have been spinning their wheels. fortunately for us, we've gotten away from the european situation, somewhat. because it looks like our economy can gain some traction. but it's immediately going to grind to a halt if we don't see something. >> you know, there's one area, the
speaker boehner, majority leader cantor, majority whip mccarthy, democratic leader pelosi, democratic whip hoyer, house foreign affairs committee chairwoman ileana ros-lehtinen, and ranking member, mr. berman of california, as well as mr. levin who has been so very helpful on the ways and means committee for all their support in drafting the bill under consideration by the house this week. it has been a pleasure to work with all these individuals. mr. speaker, as i have said i believe the magnitsky provisions are strong, flexible enough to be well implemented, and allow us to have a cooperative relationship with russia on trade and other issues while holding human rights violators, including those responsible for the brutal treatment and death of sergei magnitsky accountable. as i stated earlier i would not be supporting pntr for the russian federation if this bill did not include the sergei magnitsky rule of law accountability act. mr. speaker, i agree with what has been said about the importance of increased trade in terms of promoting more positive reforms in countries like russia, but
.6 would be 1.5 to 1, when he was with boehner, 800, wanted another 4. >> you were in the room so you know. >> first of all, since we talk about bowles-simpson so much, bowles-simpson has a 1:1 ratio. >> it doesn't. >> i thought it's 1:4. >> it's 1:3. >> in the way the bowles-simpson frame was put out something people didn't realize was that in terms of the revenue number they weren't counting the expiration of the high income tax cuts which they proposed to get rid of. apples to apples, in terms of the way people are currently adding up their math, it's approximately a 1:1 ratio. >> erskine bowles said you should look at 3:1 in terms of spending cuts to revenue. >> i'm just saying what was in bowles-simpson. >> let's not forget about growth, we need to stimulate growth and a lot of it on the innovation side. >> david thank you, appreciate it i put away money. i was 21, so i said, "hmm, i want to retire at 55." and before you know it, i'm 58 years old. time went by very fast. it goes by too, too fast. ♪ but i would do it again in a heartbeat. [ laughs ] ♪ ♪ . >>> welcome back, everyb
it off track when there were in fact very close. i think boehner has been very clear. i think revenues are on the table. they are at the moment drawing a line on tax rates, but we will see where that goes. the last time, you are right, didn't work and we were not facing quite the same set of circumstances we are facing today so i'm cautiously optimistic although i will offer to say lastly that people sometimes say okay, it looks like simpson-bowles, everything in between zero and $4 trillion we could end up with all kinds of outcomes that may be less than i would like and maybe less than all of you would like but at least something. i'm hoping it is more over here but i don't know. >> and steve, so we are gathered here to talk about u.s. global competitiveness. how important is resolving these issues to the american position on the global economy? >> first of all i think it's important not just our position in the global comment about our position in the world. admiral mullen who was the previous chairman of the joint chiefs of staff said our greatest national security threat was our f
. the caucus urges you to join speaker boehner today in the rayburn room at 11:00 a.m. as he honors dr. james billington and his exemplary quarter century of leadership at the library of congress. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey rise? the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, i rise to congratulate mr. wade martin of montgomery township, new jersey, for being awarded the 2012 land trust alliances prestigious national conservation service award for his significant contributions to the advancement of land conservation. mr. lance: using his position as financial advisor, mr. martin is educating his clients to the benefits of land preservation. his provided land trust and owners across new jersey for the benefit of land conservation. wade martin has taken his innovative land model nationwide to other financial advisors and their clients explore various options in preserving their land and their families' legacies, increasing the pace of land conservation. i ask all of my colleagues to join me in honoring wade martin as one of the na
Search Results 0 to 23 of about 24 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)